Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

[1202] That is pretty eerie in light of this Westbrook "discussion". Wall (through 4 years) is the slightly-more-assists, slightly-fewer-shots version of Westbrook. The only other differences are that Russ has a lot more playoffs and Wall got injured last year.

This shot is inconsistent but not terrible. But he's so damn fast, he can pretty much blow by anybody and he has a remarkable ability to block shots and get rebounds you don't think he has a chance to get. Tthe point situation is a big mismatch in favor of the Wizards.

This is the kind of thing that went into my Wade comparison for Wall -- though with Wade its as much about strength as it is speed w.r.t. getting into the lane and finishing.

The amazing thing about Wade is his timing. He really doesn't get up that high in the air (gets his wrist above the rim, but not much more than that) yet can finish the oop and block shots all day. He definitely does not get up in the air like Lebron, who often comes close to hitting his head on the rim.

Phil is. I'd be worried if I were Phil. Kerr lives in California, the Warriors are light years better, and the former NBA player helping run the Warriors has a proven track and stays out of the public light.

Phil is. I'd be worried if I were Phil. Kerr lives in California, the Warriors are light years better, and the former NBA player helping run the Warriors has a proven track and stays out of the public light.

His daughter also goes to Berkeley and he's best buddies with Tolbert, who's the biggest radio host in the area (and occasional Warriors color commentator).

I haven't followed the league that closely this year but wtf is the deal with Jackson and Scal and the Warriors? Any Warriors fans close the situation want to fill me in? From a distance it seems like a ########### and Jackson seems like a decent enough coach as they go, certainly I don't think you fire him to hire Kerr or SVG...

I haven't followed the league that closely this year but wtf is the deal with Jackson and Scal and the Warriors? Any Warriors fans close the situation want to fill me in? From a distance it seems like a ########### and Jackson seems like a decent enough coach as they go, certainly I don't think you fire him to hire Kerr or SVG...

The 30k foot version is that Lacob has been very involved in day to day stuff and Jackson bristled at that more than some coaches do. The other assistant coach who got fired was supposedly seen as a spy for management and was taping conversations with other coaches, which is essentially what got him fired.

The Warriors in the last six weeks demoted one assistant and fired another, and ESPN.com’s Chris Broussard today reported that the team fired Darren Erman after learning Erman had recorded at least one coaches’ meeting. Multiple league sources confirmed the gist of Broussard’s report, and that Erman was concerned Mark Jackson and other coaches loyal to Jackson were insulting Erman to other players behind Erman’s back.

The team had no choice but to fire Erman. However, the front office is fond of Erman and was upset at having to let him go, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter. The Erman firing and demotion of Brian Scalabrine have raised tensions throughout the Warriors’ organization.

Jackson made a show of firing Scalabrine in front of players and other coaches, but he had no real grounds, and the front office made Jackson find a compromise, per a source familiar with the matter: demoting Scalabrine to the D-League. In addition, Jackson has asked that Jerry West, a high-level adviser in Golden State, not attend most practices and team activities, sources say.

The tension with Erman got weird. Midseason, the team moved Erman’s parking spot to a less convenient place, likely at the behest of Jackson or one of Jackson’s allies on the staff, per multiple sources familiar with the matter. They began changing his duties in strange ways.

The atmosphere has bordered on poisonous, though to the credit of Jackson, his staff, and his players, it has not spilled onto the court.

Ric Bucher was on the Simmons podcast yesterday and said that Scalabrine felt that Jackson was doing everything wrong as a coach and was pretty public with those feelings. His takeaway on the whole situation seemed to be that Lacob was a meddling owner who thinks he knows a lot about basketball, and that Jackson wasn't receptive to a lot of his suggestions.

That said, I don't have a whole lot of faith in Bucher as an unbiased reporter.

Thanks guys, seems like some petty ass ####. That Brian Scalabrine of all people could critique Jackson both in and out of the org seems ludicrous to me. It's not like Jackson flopped as a coach, he did fairly well by new coach standards, hell of a lot better than Vinny Del Negro for example and he actually managed to coach 2 different teams.

Hopefully Jackson can find a new rival team for his players to repeatedly commit flagrant fouls against, self proclaimed man of class and integrity that he is. Although if goes the Lakers probably not.

That's a totally different read on the situation than I have (and one that gives too much credit to Bucher over everything else that's been coming out). To me, it sounds like Jackson completely failed at the managing part of the job - both in dealing with his bosses and his employees. The fact that he didn't lose his players speaks to his personality and leadership style - in fact, fighting with everyone was probably a rallying point that he used. Seems fireable enough to me, and that doesn't even take into account the legitimate complaints that can be raised about his coaching (lack of offensive sets/extreme iso, odd substitution patterns, etc).

To me, it sounds like Jackson completely failed at the managing part of the job - both in dealing with his bosses and his employees.

Could be, he does seem like a guy that has a "my way or the highway" style and while that works for the elite coaches it's not going to work for the mediocre ones. People will put up with a lot of interpersonal bs for a genius level employee, he's not that.

That's a totally different read on the situation than I have (and one that gives too much credit to Bucher over everything else that's been coming out).

Oh yeah, I didn't mean to present that as the definitive account of what happened, but it's the most detail I've heard about the Scalabrine/Jackson blowup. There are other reports that there was a recent Jackson/Kirk Lacob blowup and that they were no longer on speaking terms.

I think it probably depends on how Durant and Westbrook feel about him. If they don't like him, then I think "losing" might be enough. If they do, and I assume that they mostly do, then I think he will stick around.

But, with most people expecting a long series, Clippers in 4 or 5 would Brooks in some people's cross-hairs IMO.

MIA's strategy appears to be to play with teams, then turn up the intensity for 5-10 minutes in the third quarter. I wonder if that strategy will be as effective in the Finals. (I don't think that there's any way that the Wizards or Nets realistically beat Miami).

Jackson's players do love him and the Warriors took the Clips to 7 games despite the fact that Bogut and O'Neal were out for most of the series. I also find it telling that the Inside the NBA crew were pretty harsh in their criticism of the move. Those guys do have influence amongst the players.

To be fair, the Warriors probably benefited from the Sterling controversy. That series might have ended earlier without that.

I agree with most of 1235. People may not like Jackson or his rotations, and the assistant coach thing is weird, but:

1. The Warriors have had two good years in a row.
2. They just had their best season in many years. They have improved under Jackson.
3. Their fan base,always good, is jumping.
4. They were playing without Bogut and extended a team that is better than they are to 7 tough games.
5. This is what Steph Curry had to say after Game 7:

After losing to the Clippers, Warriors All-Star guard Stephen Curry said, "I love Coach more than anybody. For him to be in a position where his job is under scrutiny and under question is totally unfair."

(I don't think that there's any way that the Wizards or Nets realistically beat Miami).

Do you mean in one game or...?

Being serious a moment, LeBron and company have definitely looked at the remaining bracket, rubbed their chins and said, "You know, we definitely could go 12-0 here..." I wonder how much, if any, risk there is of Miami unnecessarily killing themselves on a quest for a 16-0 playoffs and immortality, and leaving themselves worn out and vulnerable for the Western Conference champion.

But then again, finishing their series early affords extra time to rest, right? ...

Parker is still one of the quickest players in the league, and Ginobili is still sneaky athletic even if he's not the athlete he was several years ago. Duncan isn't unathletic for a 7 footer, and Splitter is more athletic than most centers. Leonard is above average with athleticim, and Danny Green is pretty athletic too. Even Diaw is pretty athletic for a fat man.

The Spurs' core players are not particularly athletic compared to those of the other top West teams. They are still built largely around 3 guys in their 30s, two over 35, and also give heavy minutes to Diaw and Belinelli. Leonard is a good athlete. The Spurs were 20th in steals, 9th in blocks. The Spurs win on skill, balance, and execution.

Portland has a good team, but they are not really good on defense (16th in DRTG) and the Spurs are going to chew teams like that up some nights--like tonight. As I said prior to Game 7 of the Dallas series, the Spurs are the most likely team in the West to post some big wins, and if they get Portland and the Clippers instead of Houston and Oklahoma City, that will probably help them to do that, as we are seeing tonight.

As a Warriors fan, it certainly seems like the players (i.e. Steph Curry) liked Jackson as a coach and a motivator and are probably upset today, but the hope is that next year when they (theoretically) have an offense that gets them open shots and has a cohesive plan they'll come around. One thing to consider is Curry's head coach experience is extremely limited and bad to boot - he's played for a coach who didn't care (Nellie in his final year), a retread (Keith Smart), and now Jackson. Among those three Jackson is definitely the tallest midget. Curry hasn't really had a "complete" coach yet who is good with the Xs and Os and can motivate at the same time. If the Warriors can get a guy like that hopefully he/the players will come around.

Jackson's players do love him and the Warriors took the Clips to 7 games despite the fact that Bogut and O'Neal were out for most of the series. I also find it telling that the Inside the NBA crew were pretty harsh in their criticism of the move. Those guys do have influence amongst the players

I think this is even a controversy because Mark Jackson is friends with all the commentators at both TNT and ESPN.

I read Strauss' mostly pro-management piece on the Jackson firing, as well as a couple of other pieces. Sounds like a lot of it was personal/cultural (Jackson's continuing as a pastor at a church in LA and going down there a lot, Jackson's talking about his faith a lot, Jackson's not wanting West and Lacob around, Jackson's hiring Lindsey Hunter and thinking Erman was a spy etc. etc. etc.)

So...on the one hand, Jackson isn't Popovich. Very few coaches have the status to diss the owner and get by with it, and it sounds like Jackson can be tough to deal with if you have to manage him. One thing you can always find in the NBA is a guy to be your coach. OTOH, though, the players really like him and the team has been doing well, so color me skeptical that this will help GS.

I am not sure Curry benefits from structure; I think weak coaching has probably been a bonus for his development. Other coaches might have throttled the whole end-a-fastbreak-with-a-26-foot-pullup-three thing. As I've said many times, as presently constructed, I think Jackson has gotten basically everything possible from this Warriors team and perhaps more. Mike Malone got a lot of credit for the Warriors defense but I think their defense actually improved after he left and Sacramento's defense didn't really develop at all. Jackson does seem like a weird guy; perhaps this is a Buck Showalter type situation.

Agreed, but leads to a follow-up question: How many guys are truly good at both of those skills?

I think this postseason is really cementing Doc Rivers' legacy as one of the best coaches probably we've ever seen.

Jackson got fired after a 50 win season and a first round playoff exit for a team that appeared to be on the upswing and hoped it could advance past the first round even if they were not necessarily favored to do so. Lionel Hollins and George Karl had a similar experience last year and we heard quite a bit about both of them. In all three cases, there were personality conflicts between the coach and the upper management and it seemed like the first round loss was more of a pretext to get someone that fit better. GS and MEM both had relatively new ownership groups and Denver had a turnover with Ujiri leaving for Toronto.

I bring this up because it helps with the context of the reaction. Yes, Jackson's relationship with the media probably amplified the reaction, but I think there was criticism of management in each case. Also, it helps to show that Jackson was not treated differently from a couple of other coaches with very different styles in recent history.

Heat: I agree that they are probably underrated by metrics that look at what they did over the course of the season because they seemed to care less than most other teams about reguar season success. Between Wade's days off, experimenting with guys like Beasley and Oden, old guys limiting their minutes and possibly effort, and Lebron and Bosh (probably) holding something in reserve, I think they are better now than most mid-50s win teams in the playoffs would be.

My guess at coaches who are currently good at motivation and X's and O's: Rivers, Carlisle, Popovich, Spoelstra, Casey, Thibs
Coaches who might fit who I want to see more: Stotts, Joerger, Hornacek, Budenholzer, Clifford, Stevens, Brown
Unemployed coaches who I would say fit: Karl, Van Gundy 2x, Hollins
Question marks who I would not fire if they worked for me: Shaw, Vogel
Other big names out there: Kerr, Hoiberg

Adelman was not a good coach last year, but obviously had been in the past. Who knows if Jerry Sloan wants to coach again, but I think he would be great. I did not speculate about assistant coaches- there are probably at least a couple out there who could be pretty good quickly.

That is 21 coaches who would be at least interesting and have upside on both tactics and motivation for next year. Given the advantage talented rosters have over bad teams in terms of attracting coaches, I don't think there is any reason for a good team to enter next year with a coach who doesn't fit that profile.

Edit: I would also be at the front of the line to hire Etore Messina if I was running a middle of the pack team who needed a coach.

Yes, Brett Brown. Hard to tell if a guy forced to start Henry Sims and Hollis Thompson in the NBA is a good coach, but there were some positive signs (particularly early). At very least, I don't think he did anything in year 1 to make me think he should not have a job next year.

Granting that there may have been a bigger directive from the franchise and the talent was, uh, lacking, I have trouble putting a coach who presided over a million game losing streak on even the tentatively good list. I wouldn't fire him or anything but I think we have almost no evidence on Brett Brown on the motivation axis and the evidence is negative.

I feel like we've never talked about Monty Williams, but he has to be on the hot seat to get the Pelicans to the playoffs next year, right?

My guess at coaches who are currently good at motivation and X's and O's: Rivers, Carlisle, Popovich, Spoelstra, Casey, Thibs

I'd agree with this list, and add that this still can also be highly dependent on the situation and roster. Around the All-Star break this year, Vogel is probably on that list. Of course, I'm pretty confident some of those guys would be pretty damn successful anywhere, but others might still TBD (Casey and Spo, for instance).

Is that Mike Brown? I think we've seen enough of him. Without Lebron, it's pretty clear that he's not a good coach.

I'd have to disagree. The Lakers looked better under him than without. The Cavs, for all their warts, finally played defense like a team that could make the playoffs. He's not a great coach and has some noteworthy flaws, but I think he gets way too unfairly maligned.

FWIW- Casey coached well in Minnesota. He kept an awful roster around KG afloat and did not get enough of a chance after the FO had unrealistic expectations with a poor roster. I also thought he kept his Toronto rosters playing slightly above their talent levels and I respect how he gets the most out of flawed but talented guys like Johnson, Patterson, and Vasquez.

FWIW- Casey coached well in Minnesota. He kept an awful roster around KG afloat and did not get enough of a chance after the FO had unrealistic expectations with a poor roster. I also thought he kept his Toronto rosters playing slightly above their talent levels and I respect how he gets the most out of flawed but talented guys like Johnson, Patterson, and Vasquez.

I'm not disagreeing. He seems like a guy that should have had more chances than he did. The only black mark in my opinion is that twice Vinnie Del Negro beat him out for a job. And this is really the first year you've seen the results that you'd expect.

Berg, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on Wittman. Obviously his record before this year was extremely poor; I don't know how much of that was him and how much was a lack of talent.

I didn't know what to think of him in Minnesota. His only full season was the worst roster the Wolves have had since I have paid close attention to them (Jefferson, Gomes, Craig Smith, Jaric, and McCants were the WS leaders). He split the previous season- KG's last in MN- with Casey. Casey went 20-20, Wittman went 12-30. I thought he was a glorified interim coach who was never seen as a real candidate.

My perception of him was not much different in Washington, although I did not follow them as closely. He once again took over for a coach fired in season and just lingered. I think Wall and Beal are an outstanding back court and they would be at least this good in a weak East with just about any coach, so a slightly above .500 record this year does not change my mind about him.

"Do you remember when Lance Stephenson and Evan Turner got into that fight? It was all over Roy Hibbert and Paul George. Lance has been getting all the blame for the Pacers off nights and during that day at practice Lance says 'y'all need to look at Roy's ass, he's been off ever since he found out PG was f****** his b****'," the source stated in his Baller Mail on Baller Alert.

I think Wall and Beal are an outstanding back court and they would be at least this good in a weak East with just about any coach, so a slightly above .500 record this year does not change my mind about him.

I don't disagree (I said before the playoffs that their regular season was disappointing, given their talent and relatively good health); I'm just having a hard time figuring out what his specific problems are. They seem to play unselfishly on offense, their defense is decent, the rotations seem fine, the players seem to like him. The whole thing is kind of a mystery to me. Perhaps it goes back to what rr said a few pages ago; that the effect of coaches in general is overrated, apart from the outliers at both ends. Most of these guys can win with talent, and lose without it.

1. Start with the worst defensive team in the NBA (#30 d-rating)
2. Add Al Jefferson, who has never had a reputation for playing defense, as your big off season move
3. Finish 5th in d-rating and make the playoffs.

Maybe he's just an outlier. It seems to me that there are about 5-10 coaches who can significantly affect team defense, and a bunch who are irrelevant.

that the effect of coaches in general is overrated, apart from the outliers at both ends.

It seems to me that there are about 5-10 coaches who can significantly affect team defense

It seems like these go hand-in-hand. If Clifford can continue that accomplishment for a few years, he will fit into the category of really good coaches. I can't identify anything Wittman does that is so much better than a million other guys who aren't sociopaths on the sidelines, so I can't elevate him much.

Who's next? Will it take less than 1 game this time? (I guess it technically did with the Bulls)

I think he's done. I can't see any team signing him unless he proves that he's physically healthy. He's going to have to show in around preseason next year if he wants to continue his career. I bet he's done, though.

This Bynum business makes me real sad. I so enjoyed watching him take such substantial leaps in growth during his first 6 years in the league despite the fits and starts. Now I'm watching a potential 1st Team Center become the giant guy with wierd hair showing up to your house in a small Geek Squad Bug.

I can't identify anything Wittman does that is so much better than a million other guys who aren't sociopaths on the sidelines, so I can't elevate him much.

Wittman hasn't been a great coach, but he's certainly been a steadying force in an organization that's had nothing but embarrassments for the better part of a decade. The front five of that team can be very good depending on which John Wall shows up that night, but there's nothing off the bench — they're running Drew Gooden out for big minutes in playoff games.

Do we have any legitimate reason to believe Durant and Westbrook are anything other than good friends and teammates? I think you're just being funny, a bit, Moses - but this is something that the media seems to talk about all the time, like Durant secretly hates Westbrook for shooting so much.

Do we have any legitimate reason to believe Durant and Westbrook are anything other than good friends and teammates?

Nope. And if either of them were ever to want or choose to leave OKC it still doesn't mean they don't get along. That won't stop the media either.

---

This would have to be either a major pain in the ass for the NBA or a convenient way for the NBA to look tough but still end up "protecting" one of their own:

Clippers co-owner Shelly Sterling confirmed Wednesday that she intends to keep ownership of the team in her family, despite the NBA's move to oust her estranged husband, Donald Sterling, who was banned for life by commissioner Adam Silver last week in the wake of racist remarks he made that were published by TMZ.

Shelly Sterling has been a co-owner of the Clippers with her husband since 1981 and is one of two alternate governors. The other, team president Andy Roeser, began an indefinite leave of absence Tuesday. The team is owned by a family trust.

"Commissioner Silver made it clear, that when he announced sanctions against Donald, that the NBA was taking no action against me or my family," Shelly Sterling said in a statement given to ESPN.

It sounds likely Donald Sterling will soon be dead, and in that case I would not be surprised if the NBA allowed Shelly Sterling to retain ownership of the Clippers.

Edit: In all honesty it has crossed my mind that probably the cleanest solution to this problem for Silver would be to quietly have Sterling whacked. Probably wouldn't be hard to make it look like a suicide or an old man dying of being old, and I doubt anyone would be interested in looking into the circumstances too vigorously. But it sounds like it won't be necessary after all.

In all honesty it has crossed my mind that probably the cleanest solution to this problem for Silver would be to quietly have Sterling whacked. Probably wouldn't be hard to make it look like a suicide or an old man dying of being old, and I doubt anyone would be interested in looking into the circumstances too vigorously. But it sounds like it won't be necessary after all.

Hit man wasn't needed, Paterno was one of those guys who was going to die 6 months after he stopped working. He knew it and that's why he fought so hard for so many years to stay on as coach. That mono-focus of course, was part of the cultural problem at my alma mater.